Wagner Model Application in Canada Labor Movement - Essay Example

Wagner Model Application in Canada Labor Movement al Affiliation: Wagner Model Application in Canada Labor Movement Labor movement is a collective terminology used to refer to an organization of working people that campaign for improved working conditions for its members and strict implementation of labor and employment laws. Trade unions are organized and focused towards representing the interests of its members, which is composed of the working class. Labor movement can be triggered by a number of factors, which includes ruling classes and political groups. Labor movement basically involves movement of employees from one organization or work place to the other. In Canada, various organizations sprouted to protect the right of employees. For instance, in the late 1880s the Nine Hour Movement was formulated to campaign for a decrease in working days from the initial twelve or eleven hours to nine hours a day. Demonstrations were held and the movement allied with the Toronto Printing staff so as to protect employees’ rights. Collision of the Toronto printer committee with the Nine Hour Movement resulted in the arrest of twenty-four members of the printer committee (Heron, 1989). Moreover, Labor movement depends on the distribution of labor markets. Labor movement can be within a state or it can be between states thus resulting in immigrant influx to nations that have a large labor markets. Canada is involved in movement of labor within its boundaries and some employees from Canada go beyond the boundaries to seek for employment. Nations cannot exist independently; therefore nations should form union and international communities that encourage free movement of employees from one nation to the other. Wagner model of labor laws strives to protect and promote employees in the Canadian workplace. The legislative, judicial and administrative basis under which the policy is founded has subjected employees to conspicuous interference by their employers. Employers prefer collective bargaining since it allows them to practice surface bargaining without the basic intension of arriving at a rational agreement. Wagner act on labor movement is also referred to as national labor act of 1935, which was founded in the statute of the United States which protected employees from the private sector, organized into a trade union and an organization that indulges in collective bargaining on behalf of the employees. Act of 1935 of national labor relations does not cover employees that are members of the railway labor act, domestic employees and federal or local government workers. Enforcement of this act was mandated to the national labor relations board which was established in 1935. NLRB was an organization mandated to indulge in collective bargaining for better working condition for its members (Tomlins, 1985). In addition, collective bargaining was not entirely delegated to trade unions. Employees were partially or fully involved in bargaining for proper and healthy working conditions. Employees have the right to organize themselves, to join or form unions that aid in labor organizations. Collective bargaining was conducted in certain procedure and governed by specific rules which include: (1) a unit of employees can only be represented by one exclusive bargaining representative. (2) Employers are appealed to fully involve their representation in bargaining with the employee representing organization so as to arrive at favorable terms that are reasonable to both parties. (3) Employees are allowed to discuss and offer suggestions for wages that best sooth them (Jamieson, 2006). Furthermore, unfair labor practice are prohibited events that the act forbids employers, employees and unions to indulge in. some of the unfair labor practices aimed at the employers include: (1) interference of employees in the course of exercising their rights that are stated at section 7 of the article. Such violations can be in form or restriction of the employees’ freedom of association and non-involvement of employees in collective bargaining. Employees from a certain unit are mandated to choose their own representative association thus violation of this right translated to violation of section 7. (2) Employers are prohibited from dominance or interference of labor organizations through financial support or any other form of support as a way of gaining bias towards it. (3) Discrimination in the process of hiring employees that are meant to discourage membership in labor organization. (4) Discrimination against employees that decide to file charges or volunteer to testify. (5) Employers are also considered to violate section 7 if they refuse to indulge in collective bargaining with the employee’s representatives. However, Republican Parties and various organizations strongly opposed Wagner model. For instance, the American liberty league perceived the act as a violation of freedom; it then carried out intensive campaigns across the country asking employees to rebel term of operation of NLRB. Most of the critics that the NLRB encounter was on the basis of zero involvement of the employers and their allies in the managerial board of the organization (Tomlins, 1985). In addition, opponents of the Wagner model have over the years appealed for amendment of the model. Amendments that were claimed by the opponent were based on the fact that the NLRB has to take a neutral stand during collective bargaining. NLRB dismissed this claim and continuously supported employee over employers on matters of collective bargaining for healthy working conditions and wages. Although Canadian employees were granted the right to belong to trade unions and the right to withdrawal labor during disputes, employers also had the right to dismiss an employee since they belonged to unions that protect their rights as well. Employees are therefore adamant to joining trade unions since during periods of economic depression; it is difficult for them to get a new job than for an employer to get another employee. Thus the primary goal of trade unions to protect employees from exploitation is only valid to few employees who belong to these organizations. Employees that do not belong to trade unions are therefore vulnerable to exploitation and thus undermining the service delivery of trade unions (Liebman, 2012). In addition, the idea of collective bargaining undermined labors relationship in Canada. Collective bargaining exposed employers to the public thus compromising the process of wage determination and working conditions. Therefore, most employers tend to prefer employees that are free from trade union so that their wage and working condition disputes are settled without the involvement of external organizations. However, employee protection by trade unions has resulted in improved working conditions and reasonable pay for employee at all levels of employment in Canada. Since Canada’s economy is not depressed, then belonging to a trade union offers more benefits than drawbacks, therefore, the implementation of Wagner model has successfully granted protection to a majority of employees. References Heron, C. (1989). The Canadian Labor Movement. J. Lorimer. Print. Jamieson, S. M. (2006). Labor Relations. Canada. HISTORICA CANADA. Retrieved From: http://thecanadianencyclopedia.com/en/article/labour-relations/ Liebman, W. B. (2012). Labor Day is the time to salute the Wegner Act. Los Angeles Times. Retrieved From: www.articles.latimes.com/2012/sep/03/opinion/ Tomlins, C. L.( 1985). The State and the Unions. CUP Archive. Print. Read More